It’s onerous to recollect this a lot of an uproar over one thing a newspaper didn’t write.
The Washington Submit’s resolution to not make an endorsement for president has workers seething and its viewers so indignant that it’s reportedly canceling subscriptions by the hundreds.
It additionally has drawn widespread criticism, together with from among the paper’s most legendary journalists.
The beautiful information got here down late final week when Will Lewis, the Submit’s writer and CEO, put out a statement saying the paper wouldn’t be making a presidential endorsement for the primary time in 36 years. He pointed to the Submit’s former custom, previous to 1976, of not endorsing a candidate for president.
However in the long run, the choice to not endorse a candidate was made by Submit proprietor Jeff Bezos for causes that had nothing to do with custom.
The New York Times’ Benjamin Mullin and Katie Robertson reported, “The editorial board had already drafted an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris, although Mr. Bezos didn’t learn it earlier than his resolution, Mr. Lewis mentioned in an announcement on Saturday. The choice by Mr. Bezos had been within the making for weeks. It’s not clear what motivated his ultimate dedication or its timing.”
The choice and the timing — lower than two weeks earlier than the election — drew swift condemnation.
Marty Baron, the well-respected former govt editor of the Submit, tweeted, “That is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty. @realdonaldtrump will see this as an invite to additional intimidate proprietor @jeffbezos (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an establishment famed for braveness.”
Showing on CNN, Baron said, “To declare a second of excessive precept solely 11 days earlier than the election — that’s simply extremely suspect. It’s simply to not be believed that this was a matter of precept at this level.”
Baron additionally mentioned, “If their philosophy is readers could make up their very own minds on the massive points that they face on this democracy, then don’t run any editorials. However the reality is that they solely determined to not run an editorial on this one occasion 11 days earlier than the election.”
Robert Kagan, an editor at giant who has written for the Submit for greater than twenty years, resigned. He instructed the Instances that the choice was “clearly an indication of pre-emptive favor currying” of Donald Trump. Kagan added, “The Submit has been emphasizing that Donald Trump is a menace to democracy. And so that is the election, that is the time after we determined that we’re impartial?”
In an interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett, Kagan mentioned, “If we wish to understand how Trump goes to stifle the free press within the U.S., that is the reply. That is the way it’s going to occur, particularly when the media is owned by company titans who’ve quite a bit to lose if Trump is indignant at them.”
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the legendary Submit reporters finest identified for his or her work on Watergate, issued a joint statement to CNN’s Brian Stelter, saying, “We respect the standard independence of the editorial web page, however this resolution 11 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Submit’s personal overwhelming reportorial proof on the menace Donald Trump poses to democracy. Beneath Jeff Bezos’s possession, the Washington Submit’s information operation has used its plentiful assets to scrupulously examine the hazard and harm a second Trump presidency might trigger to the way forward for American democracy and that makes this resolution much more stunning and disappointing, particularly this late within the electoral course of.”
As well as, 19 opinion columnists on the Submit published a piece saying it was a “horrible mistake” to not make an endorsement.
They wrote, “It represents an abandonment of the elemental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love. This can be a second for the establishment to be making clear its dedication to democratic values, the rule of regulation and worldwide alliances, and the menace that Donald Trump poses to them — the exact factors The Submit made in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020.”
In a separate column, Submit columnist Ruth Marcus, who has been on the Submit for 40 years, wrote, “I’ve by no means been extra dissatisfied within the newspaper than I’m right now, with the tragically flawed resolution to not make an endorsement within the presidential race. At a second when The Submit ought to have been stepping ahead to sound the clarion name concerning the a number of risks that Donald Trump poses to the nation and the world, it has chosen as a substitute to drag again. That’s the mistaken alternative on the worst doable time.”
Michele Norris additionally introduced her resignation as a Submit columnist, writing in a lengthy X thread, “I’m deeply dissatisfied by The Submit’s resolution to reverse course and withhold a presidential endorsement on this election cycle when the superb reporting all through everything of the paper makes clear all that’s at stake within the election and around the globe.”
Former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, has been one of the vital outspoken politicians concerning the menace Trump poses. She was the chairwoman of a committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol rebellion.
Talking with New Yorker editor David Remnick on the twenty fifth annual New Yorker Competition, Cheney mentioned, “On the difficulty of The Washington Submit, look, to start with, it’s worry. … When you might have Jeff Bezos apparently afraid to challenge an endorsement for the one candidate within the race who’s a secure accountable grownup as a result of he fears Donald Trump, that tells you why now we have to work so onerous to ensure that Donald Trump isn’t elected. And I additionally assume why we should not neglect what has occurred, neglect who’s taken courageous and brave stands. And I canceled my subscription to The Washington Submit, simply saying.”
OK, since Cheney introduced it up, let’s speak about these canceling their subscriptions to the Submit. Reviews are that the cancellations are within the hundreds.
One editorial author instructed Stelter, “I’m overwhelmed with the variety of heartfelt messages from readers canceling however expressing private appreciation for what I do. It breaks my coronary heart.”
However right here’s the factor. As indignant as readers may be, are they directing their anger and protest in the precise path? Whereas one can perceive readers being upset and wanting to point out some type of protest, canceling subscriptions in the end doesn’t harm Bezos. As an alternative, it hurts lots of the revered journalists on the Submit who’re simply as upset because the readers.
In a thread on X, Caroline Kitchener, who covers abortion for the Submit, wrote, “My mother simply instructed me she cancelled her subscription to The Washington Submit. She reads each one in every of my tales. It was a heartbreaking name. I perceive why she did it, however I requested her to rethink. To anybody who has cancelled or is considering cancelling, right here’s what I mentioned: Submit reporters had no half on this resolution. However whenever you cancel, you might be hurting us, not our proprietor. I really feel fortunate to work at a spot that doesn’t blink after I say I must fly to Texas to satisfy a girl whose life has been modified by an abortion ban. To doc the impacts of Dobbs up shut. I can solely do this if now we have subscribers who help us. Reporters within the Submit newsroom will proceed to do our jobs. We are going to report fearlessly on whoever turns into president, and so many different issues that actually matter, as a result of we’re impartial and care deeply about holding the highly effective to account. I fully perceive if you happen to’ve misplaced religion in our proprietor, however please, don’t lose religion in us. We have now a lot work to do.”
Los Angeles Instances proprietor Patrick Quickly-Shiong, proven right here in 2017. (AP Photograph/Evan Vucci, File)
The Washington Submit wasn’t the one paper to announce, lower than two weeks earlier than the election, that it will not make an endorsement for president. As I wrote last week, the Los Angeles Instances additionally determined to take a seat it out.
The editorial board was set to endorse Kamala Harris for president, however the paper’s proprietor, Patrick Quickly-Shiong, blocked it. Alongside the way in which, Quickly-Shiong supplied a reasonably flimsy clarification, saying he instructed the board to listing every of Harris and Trump’s professionals and cons and to elucidate every of their insurance policies. Quickly-Shiong then wrote, “On this means, with this clear and non-partisan info side-by-side, our readers might resolve who could be worthy of being President for the subsequent 4 years. As an alternative of adopting this path as urged, the Editorial Board selected to stay silent and I accepted their resolution.”
What Quickly-Shiong needed is just not how endorsements work and to recommend that the board “selected to stay silent” is each disingenuous and shameful.
In an interview with the Los Angeles Times’ James Rainey, Quickly-Shiong mentioned, “I’ve no regrets in anyway. Actually, I believe it was precisely the precise resolution. The method was (to resolve): how can we truly finest inform our readers? And there could possibly be no person higher than us who attempt to sift the info from fiction” whereas leaving it to readers to make their very own ultimate resolution.”
Mariel Garza, the Instances’ editor of editorials, resigned in protest, as did editorial board members Robert Greene and Karin Klein. Greene is a Pulitzer Prize winner.
In her letter of resignation to Instances govt editor Terry Tang, Garza wrote, “How might we spend eight years railing towards Trump and the hazard his management poses to the nation after which fail to endorse the superbly respectable Democrat challenger — who we beforehand endorsed for the U.S. Senate? The non-endorsement undermines the integrity of the editorial board and each single endorsement we make, down to highschool board races.”
Quickly-Shiong instructed Rainey, “I’m dissatisfied by the editorial (board) members resigning the way in which they did. However that’s their alternative, proper?”
The story then took one other twist over the weekend. The New York Times’ Soumya Karlamangla and Shawn Hubler wrote, “(Quickly-Shiong’s) daughter, Nika Quickly-Shiong, 31, a progressive political activist who has steadily been accused of making an attempt to meddle within the paper’s information protection, mentioned the choice was motivated by Ms. Harris’s continued help for Israel in its struggle in Gaza.”
In an announcement to the Instances, Nika Quickly-Shiong mentioned, “Our household made the joint resolution to not endorse a Presidential candidate. This was the primary and solely time I’ve been concerned within the course of. As a citizen of a rustic overtly financing genocide, and as a household that skilled South African Apartheid, the endorsement was a chance to repudiate justifications for the widespread concentrating on of journalists and ongoing struggle on youngsters.”
Nevertheless, Patrick Quickly-Shiong mentioned his daughter didn’t communicate for the paper. By way of a spokesperson’s assertion, the elder Quickly-Shiong mentioned, “Nika speaks in her personal private capability relating to her opinion, as each neighborhood member has the precise to do. She doesn’t have any position at The L.A. Instances, nor does she take part in any resolution or dialogue with the editorial board, as has been made clear many instances.”
Garza instructed The New York Instances in an announcement, “If that was the explanation that Dr. Quickly-Shiong blocked an endorsement of Kamala Harris, it was not communicated to me or the editorial writers. If the household’s aim was to ‘repudiate justifications for the widespread concentrating on of journalists and ongoing struggle on youngsters,’ remaining silent didn’t accomplish that.”
Writing for the Los Angeles Instances, Rainey reported that the Instances’ union members need a fuller clarification of why there was no endorsement. A letter signed by greater than 200 Instances journalists to Quickly-Shiong mentioned, “These of us who work within the newsroom, quite than on the Editorial Board, do not need a place on whether or not a presidential endorsement ought to have been made. Nevertheless, all of us anticipate The Instances to be clear with readers.”
The Washington Submit and Los Angeles Instances aren’t the one papers sitting out endorsements for presidential candidates this 12 months. My colleague, Rick Edmonds, writes how different papers additionally aren’t endorsing anybody for president, and the doable causes behind it.
Edmonds talked to editors at 4 papers which can be nonetheless endorsing candidates.
Edmonds then wrote, “I’m not a noncombatant on the flight of the regionals from presidential endorsements. The trendy argument has change into that voters ought to merely be told by information and editorial pages after which resolve for themselves. Fallacious? In the event that they learn the paper’s advice, because the executives I talked with urged, voters will nonetheless resolve for themselves.”
He added, “I get that these are polarized instances (although perhaps not uniquely so). However the thought is to keep away from offending the half or so of the viewers who will likely be voting for Trump. Being afraid of your personal readers strikes me as wishy-washy. And wishy-washy is a nasty place for information shops to be.”
The Every day Present’s Jordan Klepper, who has gone across the nation attending Trump rallies and interviewing attendees, appeared on Jen Psaki’s MSNBC present on Sunday morning and talked about how these rallies have modified.
Klepper told Psaki, “There’s much less of an vitality there. There’s not many individuals displaying up. It feels drained. There’s undoubtedly MAGA people who’re going across the loop and have been there a thousand instances.”
Klepper talked about a person who he has met who has gone to 93 of those rallies. Klepper added, “Nevertheless it feels just like the circus has been round to your city many, many instances and never all people is displaying up for this final go-around.”
Trump held a giant rally Sunday at Madison Sq. Backyard in New York Metropolis.
The next is all true.
One of many early comic warm-up audio system, Tony Hinchcliffe, instructed the group, “I don’t know if you understand this however there’s actually a floating island of rubbish in the midst of the ocean proper now. I believe it’s referred to as Puerto Rico.”
He additionally made a joke a few Black man within the crowd after which mentioned, “I’m simply kidding. That’s one in every of my buddies. He had a Halloween occasion final night time. We had enjoyable. We carved watermelons collectively. It was superior.”
Christopher Mathias, a reporter for HuffPost, tweeted, “Like complete factor is shockingly racist even for a Trump rally.”
David Rem, described as Trump’s childhood buddy, waved a crucifix and mentioned of Kamala Harris, “She is the satan. She is the Antichrist.”
Businessman Grant Cardone instructed the group that Harris “and her pimp handlers will destroy our nation.”
The rally featured a who’s who of Republican and MAGA audio system, together with Trump operating mate JD Vance, Home Speaker Mike Johnson, Tulsi Gabbard, Rudy Giuliani, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Lara Trump, Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Elon Musk, Stephen Miller, Dana White, Tucker Carlson and plenty of extra.
And, in fact, Trump, who gave what has change into a typical rambling speech that usually drifted into harmful rhetoric.
Poynter’s PolitiFact live fact-checked the Trump rally.
One ultimate thought: Whose thought was it to place somebody on a stage who was going to insult Puerto Ricans in an election that’s razor shut? Kamala Harris’ marketing campaign wasted no time seizing on it, putting out a tweet with particulars about what Harris will do to assist construct a chance economic system for Puerto Ricans.
San Antonio Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, proven right here in a recreation from final March. (AP Photograph/Eric Homosexual)
- San Antonio Spurs coach Gregg Popovich, actually one of many biggest basketball coaches of all time, went off on Donald Trump throughout a press convention on Saturday. Popovich was requested by a French journalist, “Only one query concerning the U.S. election: What do you consider that, and is it vital for the way forward for the democracy of the USA?” Popovich talked for 13 minutes, together with saying “He’s pathetic. He’s small. He’s a whiner. … He’s a broken man.” It’s price watching.
- CNN’s Daniel Dale with “32 false claims Trump made to Joe Rogan.”
- Kamala Harris sat down with Norah O’Donnell for CBS’s “Face the Nation.” Here’s the transcript.
- Right here’s Jake Tapper’s interview with Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance.
- Wall Avenue Journal senior personal-technology columnist Joanna Stern interviews actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt in “Why Joseph Gordon-Levitt Is Worried About AI.”
Have suggestions or a tip? E-mail Poynter senior media author Tom Jones at [email protected].
The Poynter Report is our day by day media publication. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, join here.
